1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to implants for use in minimally invasive total knee replacement surgery. More particularly, this invention relates to modular bearing surfaces and mobile-bearing and fixed-bearing modular components in arthroplasty of human joints.
2. Description of the Related Art
A joint, such as the ankle, knee, hip or shoulder, generally consists of two or more relatively rigid bony structures that maintain a relationship with each other. Soft tissue structures spanning the bony structures hold the bony structures together and aid in defining the motion of one bony structure to the other. In the knee, for example, the bony structures are the femur, tibia and patella. Soft tissue structures spanning the knee joint, such as muscles, ligaments, tendons, menisci, and capsule, provide force, support and stability to facilitate motion of the knee. Muscle and tendon structures spanning the knee joint, as in other joints of the body provide dynamics to move the joint in a controlled manner while stabilizing the joint to function in an orderly fashion. Dynamic stabilization is the result of primary muscle contraction to move the joint in a desired direction combined with antagonistic muscle contraction to direct resultant joint loads within favorable orientation limits relative to the bony structures of the joint. It is believed that proprioceptive feedback provides some of the control or balance between primary and antagonistic muscle contraction.
A smooth and resilient surface consisting of articular cartilage covers the bony structures. The articular surfaces of the bony structures work in concert with the soft tissue structures to form a mechanism that defines the envelop of motion between the structures. Within a typical envelop of motion, the bony structures move in a predetermined pattern with respect to one another. When fully articulated, the motion defines a total envelop of motion between the bony structures. In the knee, the soft tissue structures spanning the joint tend to stabilize from excessive translation in the joint plane defined by the tibiofemoral joint. Such tibiofemoral stability enables the femur and tibia to slide and rotate on one another in an orderly fashion.
Current methods of preparing the intra-articular rigid elements of a joint to receive components as in joint replacement surgery involve an extensive surgical exposure. The surgical exposure, ligament release and sacrifice of the anterior cruciate ligament must be sufficient to permit the introduction of guides that are placed on, in, or attach to the joint, along with cutting blocks to guide the use of saws, burrs and other milling devices, and other instruments for cutting or removing cartilage and bone that subsequently is replaced with artificial surfaces. For knee joint replacement, the distal end of the femur may be sculpted to have flat anterior and posterior surfaces generally parallel to the length of the femur, a flat end surface normal to the anterior and posterior surfaces, and angled flat surfaces joining the above mentioned surfaces, all for the purpose of receiving a prosthetic device. In general these are referred to as the anterior, posterior, and distal and chamfer cuts, respectively. In current total knee arthroplasty proper knee alignment is attained by preoperative planning and x-ray templating. Anterior-posterior (NP) and lateral x-ray views are taken of the knee in full extension. The mechanical axis of the tibia and of the femur is marked on the NP x-ray. The angle between these lines is the angle of varus/valgus deformity to be corrected. In the A/P view, the angle of the distal femoral resection relative to the femoral mechanical axis, hence the angle of the femoral implant, is predetermined per the surgical technique for a given implant system. Similarly, the angle of the tibial resection relative to the tibial mechanical axis, hence the angle of the tibial implant, is predetermined per the surgical technique for a given implant system. The femoral resection guides are aligned on the femur to position the distal femoral resection relative to the femoral mechanical axis and the tibial resection guides are aligned on the tibia to position the proximal tibial resection relative to the tibial mechanical axis. If the cuts are made accurately, the femoral mechanical axis and the tibial mechanical axis will align in the NP view. This approach addresses knee alignment at full extension only. Knee alignment at 90° of flexion is generally left to surgeon judgment and knee alignment throughout the range of motion has not been addressed in the past. In aligning the knee at 90° the surgeon rotates the femoral component about the femoral mechanical axis to a position believed to provide proper tensioning of the ligaments spanning the knee.
Knee joint prosthesis of the type referred to above are well known, and are described, for example, in Caspari et al., U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,171,244, 5,171,276 and 5,336,266, Brown, U.S. Pat. No. 4,892,547, Burstein et al., U.S. Pat. No. 4,298,992, and Insall et al., U.S. Pat. No. 6,068,658.
Substantial effort has been made to provide appropriate degrees of curvature to the condyles in knee joint replacement. For example, the earlier mentioned U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,171,276, 4,298,992 and 6,068,658 show that the radius of curvature in the anterior-posterior direction of the condyle of a femoral prosthesis may be somewhat greater near the anterior portion of the condyle than near the posterior portion. Kester at al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,824,100 teaches that a portion of this curvature of the condyle may be formed about a constant radius having its origin along a line between the lateral and medial collateral ligament attachment points on the femur.
Historically, a variety of modular prosthetic joint implants have been developed. The following descriptions of modular implants relate specifically to the knee. Early designs for knee implants, called polycentric knee implants, were developed with separate components for the femoral and tibial surfaces of the medial and lateral tibiofemoral compartments. In this implant the patellofemoral compartment was not resurfaced. Orientating the separate components one to another, for example aligning the medial and lateral femoral components to one another, or the medial and lateral tibial components to one another, was not addressed in these designs and often left for the surgeon to make free hand resections resulting in a surgically challenging procedure. Designs emerged, such as the UCI and Gustilo knees in which the femoral condylar components were connected into an integral, unitary component as were the tibial components. The next advancement in total knee implant design was to include the patellofemoral joint by making an integral, unitary femoral component to resurface the medial and lateral femoral condyles and the patellar groove. Implants to resurface the patella were developed in conjunction with the tri-compartmental femoral components. Additionally, modular fixed-bearing knee implants, generally referred to as semi-constrained, having a polyethylene insert that is held relatively rigidly in place have been developed. Translation and axial rotation between the tibia and femur that occurs naturally with knee motion is accommodated in these designs by non-conforming tibiofemoral contact for the medial and lateral condyles. Such designs tend to have higher contact pressure which may accelerate wear and degradation of the polyethylene bearing surface. Alternately, there are mobile bearing knee implants wherein the polyethylene bearing is designed to slide or move with minimal or no constraint on a tibial baseplate. These mobile bearing designs have high conformity between the polyethylene insert and femoral condyle and the polyethylene insert and tibial baseplate resulting in lower contact stresses and a more durable design. Furthermore, both meniscal bearing and fixed bearing knee implants have been developed including either separate polyethylene bearings or a single polyethylene bearing that resides on a metallic tibial baseplate. While implant systems have been developed with fixed bearing elements or mobile bearing elements on the medial and lateral sides of the tibiofemoral joint, systems have not been developed having a combination of a fixed bearing on one side and a mobile bearing on the other side of the tibiofemoral joint.
Two primary difficulties exist with current joint replacement surgeries. These relate to the invasiveness of the procedure and achieving proper alignment and kinematics of the bony structures and the prostheses thereupon. Such difficulties are present in all total joint replacements, including ankle, knee, hip, shoulder and spine.
Alignment. A difficulty with implanting both modular and non-modular knee implants having either separate femoral and/or tibial components has been achieving a correct relationship between the components. Surgical instruments available to date have not provided trouble free use in implanting multi-part implants wherein the distal femur, proximal tibia and posterior patella are prepared for precise component-to-component orientation. While alignment guides aid in accurate orientation of opposing components relative to the axis of the long bones to achieve a restoration of a correct tibiofemoral varus/valgus alignment (usually 4-7 degrees valgus), they provide limited positioning or guidance relevant to correct subcomponent-to-subcomponent alignment in placing a plurality of components to form the articular surface of a femoral component or a tibial component and/or ligament tension to restore alignment and soft tissue balance. For the patellofemoral joint, proper tibiofemoral alignment is required to re-establish proper tracking of the patella as created by the lateral pull of the quadriceps mechanism, the articular surface of the femoral patellar groove and maintaining the tibiofemoral joint line.
While surgical instruments available to date aid in accurate varus/valgus alignment, they provide limited positioning or guidance relevant to correct flexion/extension orientation of the femoral, posterior slope of tibial components, nor of external rotation of the femoral component. For optimum knee kinematics, femoral component flexion/extension and external rotation orientation, tibial component posterior slope and ligaments spanning the joint work in concert maintaining soft tissue balance throughout the knee's range of motion.
In a properly aligned knee, the mechanical axis of the leg (a straight line drawn from the center of the hip joint to the center of the ankle) passes slightly medial to the center of the knee. This alignment is generally called the gross alignment of the leg. The alignment of the implants impacts the gross alignment of the leg. If the implants are malaligned, the resulting mechanical axis may be shifted medially or laterally, resulting in an imbalance in the loads carried by the medial or lateral condyles. This imbalance, if severe, may lead to early failure of the arthroplasty.
In the case of a plurality of sub-components resurfacing the distal femur or proximal tibia, the orientation of the sub-components to each other, for example the orientation of the medial femoral condylar sub-component to the femoral trochlear sub-component and or the lateral femoral condylar sub-component; orientation of the medial tibial component to a separate lateral tibial component; and orientation of the femoral component to its corresponding tibial component, with free standing uni-compartmental, bi-compartmental and tri-compartmental implants has largely not been addressed. This may account for the high failure rates in the surgical application of free standing compartmental replacements, used individually or in combination, and as well as for the higher failure rate of uni-compartmental implants relative to total knee implants as demonstrated in some clinical studies. When considering uni-compartmental and bi-compartmental designs, alignment of each part relative to the other parts is critical to avoid accelerated wear with a mal-articulation of the components.
Although various prosthetic devices have been successfully used with patients, the configuration and position of the articulating surfaces of the prosthesis, for example the condyles in a knee joint, are predetermined based upon the prosthesis that is selected. With a give knee implant system the implants are available in discrete sizes and the relationship, for example the ratio between medial-lateral width and anterior-posterior depth, vary between implant systems. While efforts are made to tailor the prosthesis to the needs of each patient by suitable prosthesis choice and size, this in fact is problematical inasmuch as the joint physiology of patients can vary substantially from one patient to another.
Invasiveness. In order to appropriately sculpt the articulating surface of a bone, it is often necessary to surgically expose the joint. In the case of the femur in traditional knee joint replacement, the patellar tendon of the knee joint is surgically exposed and is moved to one side of the joint and the patella everted to enable a substantially full anterior access to the joint. In general, the anterior cruciate ligament is excised to increase access to the joint space. Surgical exposure is necessary to accommodate the bulk and geometry of the components as well as the instruments for bone preparation. Such surgical exposure and ligament release or excision increases bleeding, pain, muscle inhibition and adverse kinematics; all of which contribute to a longer hospitalization before the patient can be safely discharged to home or an intermediate care facility.
Desirably, in the case of knee replacement surgery, neither the collateral ligaments nor the cruciate ligaments are disturbed, although it is often necessary to remove or release cruciate ligaments in the event a substantial joint replacement is to be performed. Collateral ligaments can be partially taken down or released to provide appropriate tension adjustment to the patient's knee in concert with joint replacement surgery. In most instances, such releases can be accomplished through smaller incisions than the standard midline or medial parapatellar incisions historically used for knee arthroplasty.
For patients who require articular surface replacement, including patients whose joints are not so damaged or diseased as to require whole joint replacement, the implant systems available for the knee have unitary tri-compartmental femoral components, unitary tibial components, unitary patellar components and instrumentation that require extensive surgical exposure to perform the procedure. It would be desirable to provide surgical methods and apparatuses that may be employed to gain surgical access to articulating joint surfaces, to appropriately prepare the bony structures, to provide artificial, e.g., metal, plastic, ceramic, or other suitable material for an articular bearing surface, and to close the surgical site, all without substantial damage or trauma to associated muscles, ligaments or tendons, and without extensive distraction of the joint. To attain this goal, implants and instruments are required to provide a system and method to enable articulating surfaces of the joints to be appropriately sculpted using minimally invasive apparatuses and procedures and to replace the articular surfaces with implants suitable for insertion through small incisions, assembly within the confines of the joint cavity and conforming to prepared bone support surfaces.